Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:notes to our principal

Start School Later: Consider delaying the start of the school day to after 8:30 AM. Research shows that later start times can significantly benefit students who are currently showing signs of exhaustion. This change is not only age-appropriate but has also been linked to improved student performance and well-being.

Cell Phone Use and Mental Health: There is a growing concern about cell phone addiction and its detrimental effects on students in the classroom. With mental health issues at unprecedented levels among youth, it is crucial to address and manage cell phone usage to foster a healthier learning environment and care for our kids addictions.

Notes to you:

Later Start time: No, some parents have to drive their kids and a later start time is an issue with work. Its also an issue with outside activities. Those activities enhance kids physical and mental well being. Instead be a parent and enhance a bed time.

Cell phone use: As a teacher, start teaching again. Don't do few google slides and call it a day. Use a real textbook, teach a lesson, review the homework from the previous day and hold kids accountable. Kids are partly on cell phones because they are bored. Your class is boring and not stimulating. Fix it. (and thank you to the teachers who do teach and put in an effort - referring to two we had last year who were life changing).

For high school students? You can drop off a high school student early and as long as the library or common areas are open they can study or socialize until school starts -- they aren't in preschool. Also by high school most kids can get to school on their own.

Your comment about the importance of activities would be more convincing if there was any indication that their importance should be balanced against getting proper rest so that you can be functional in school. Perhaps if kids weren't in so many activities they would not be so overtired and an early start time wouldn't matter as much. But kids are doing tons of activities on top of school and this is why they are absolutely exhausted. A later start time would be more likely to get kids needed rest than telling parents to "enforce a bedtime" (again: for high school students?) because no matter when school gets out extra-curriculars will find a way to keep kids at practice or rehearsal or whatever until 8pm or even later. But far fewer activities will try to force kids into morning practices so pushing school start until 8:30 or later gives kids a chanc eof actually getting some extra sleep.

As others have pointed out it doesn't matter how engaging classroom material is -- it can't compete with a freaking phone (or a classroom full of them). Phones are designed to distract. Opposing policies that eliminate the option of using phones in class is just bizarre.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:notes to our principal

Start School Later: Consider delaying the start of the school day to after 8:30 AM. Research shows that later start times can significantly benefit students who are currently showing signs of exhaustion. This change is not only age-appropriate but has also been linked to improved student performance and well-being.

Cell Phone Use and Mental Health: There is a growing concern about cell phone addiction and its detrimental effects on students in the classroom. With mental health issues at unprecedented levels among youth, it is crucial to address and manage cell phone usage to foster a healthier learning environment and care for our kids addictions.

Notes to you:

Later Start time: No, some parents have to drive their kids and a later start time is an issue with work. Its also an issue with outside activities. Those activities enhance kids physical and mental well being. Instead be a parent and enhance a bed time.

Cell phone use: As a teacher, start teaching again. Don't do few google slides and call it a day. Use a real textbook, teach a lesson, review the homework from the previous day and hold kids accountable. Kids are partly on cell phones because they are bored. Your class is boring and not stimulating. Fix it. (and thank you to the teachers who do teach and put in an effort - referring to two we had last year who were life changing).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As to delaying start times, how do you intend to compensate for the hardship this creates for families depending on older siblings to look after younger siblings after school or for kids who have to work to contribute to the family’s income? I don’t think it will help a student’s well-being and performance if their younger siblings are removed from the home by CPS and their parents are being charged for leaving young children unattended, or if the family faces food and/or housing insecurity from loss of income of the high schoolers after-school jobs.

As for cellphones, I’m confused by what, specifically, you’re objecting to. If you’re objecting to phone usage in class, I think everyone agrees that would be problematic and is already against policy, although perhaps the policy needs to be enforced more vigorously. If you’re objecting to a student’s use of a cellphone at home, I think you’re being shortsighted, sanctimonious, and presumptuous. Indubitably, there is some content students access on cellphones that can be extremely damaging. There is also content that can be educational and provide other positive benefits. Basically it’s a tool that allows access to electronic media, that like any media should be judged on the content rather than the format. I think most problematic content is not uniquely dependent on cellphones, but could be accessed through most electronic devices (laptops, desktops, tablets, etc.). Are you suggesting that high school students should regress to the ‘80s and rely on print versions of encyclopedias for research and typewriters to prepare their essays?

If you’re concerned about how the student’s home life is affecting their physical, mental, and emotional well-being, have you considered the effects of having marijuana smokers in their home? Even if the student doesn’t smoke themselves, we learned from tobacco that exposure to secondhand smoke is also serious. According to the CDC, not only can can secondhand exposure make someone high (which would seem to impair a student’s attempt to do homework and study), it can also have longterm impacts on a developing brain including causing problems with attention, motivation, and memory. If you want to try and regulate a student’s home life, this would seem to be more urgent than whether they have access to a cellphone.

Hey Sarah Huckabee, we are not accommodating the child labor needs of corporations and families should not be dependent on their child's labor to survive in any way

Then MCPS/you/the county needs to provide free child care in every school and offer more day care vouchers with day cares that accept it if you don't want siblings to care for each other. Check your privilege.

It's always FREE with you people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As to delaying start times, how do you intend to compensate for the hardship this creates for families depending on older siblings to look after younger siblings after school or for kids who have to work to contribute to the family’s income? I don’t think it will help a student’s well-being and performance if their younger siblings are removed from the home by CPS and their parents are being charged for leaving young children unattended, or if the family faces food and/or housing insecurity from loss of income of the high schoolers after-school jobs.

As for cellphones, I’m confused by what, specifically, you’re objecting to. If you’re objecting to phone usage in class, I think everyone agrees that would be problematic and is already against policy, although perhaps the policy needs to be enforced more vigorously. If you’re objecting to a student’s use of a cellphone at home, I think you’re being shortsighted, sanctimonious, and presumptuous. Indubitably, there is some content students access on cellphones that can be extremely damaging. There is also content that can be educational and provide other positive benefits. Basically it’s a tool that allows access to electronic media, that like any media should be judged on the content rather than the format. I think most problematic content is not uniquely dependent on cellphones, but could be accessed through most electronic devices (laptops, desktops, tablets, etc.). Are you suggesting that high school students should regress to the ‘80s and rely on print versions of encyclopedias for research and typewriters to prepare their essays?

If you’re concerned about how the student’s home life is affecting their physical, mental, and emotional well-being, have you considered the effects of having marijuana smokers in their home? Even if the student doesn’t smoke themselves, we learned from tobacco that exposure to secondhand smoke is also serious. According to the CDC, not only can can secondhand exposure make someone high (which would seem to impair a student’s attempt to do homework and study), it can also have longterm impacts on a developing brain including causing problems with attention, motivation, and memory. If you want to try and regulate a student’s home life, this would seem to be more urgent than whether they have access to a cellphone.

Hey Sarah Huckabee, we are not accommodating the child labor needs of corporations and families should not be dependent on their child's labor to survive in any way

Then MCPS/you/the county needs to provide free child care in every school and offer more day care vouchers with day cares that accept it if you don't want siblings to care for each other. Check your privilege.

That's going to happen. It's called Blueprint for Maryland's Future.

No, its not, MCPS is screaming poverty and making cuts. How are they going to provide child care?

PP is right. The Blueprint calls for middle class and up to pay for all sorts of services for poor people: food clothing, before school care, after school care, summer care, medicine, tutoring, etc. And they'll pay for it just like they pay for everything...raising taxes.

The state is committing $63 billion for the ENTIRE state in FY 2025. MCPS, because of its budget shortfall, zeroed out its initial funding of $8 million just to START planning to meet this underfunded mandate for the next school year. No dodging it after that. This is a boondoggle and if you don't like it, contact your state legislators and the governor. I am sure the state, because we are the wealthiest county, expects MoCo property taxes to cover most of our costs for the Blueprint.

Here is information on the planned state funding: https://marylandmatters.org/2024/04/23/breakdown-of-funding-for-blueprint-education-reform-plan-comes-into-focus/

We don't have sufficient classroom space now in our schools. Think of the capital costs that will need to be incurred to meet the state mandate in Blueprint for Maryland's Future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at a private MS but going to public for HS. Cell phone use is strictly prohibited during the school day right now.
Her friends in mcps have their phone with them all day long. There are videos being taken and shared in hallways and classroom. At lunch they’re staring at their phones. So even though I can Police my own kid, her experience at school will still be surrounded by cell phone useage.
It needs to be banned completely. They stay in backpacks. If you’re caught with it out it’s confiscated and taken to office where parent has to pick it up.

Same - my kid is in private and if you are caught using your cell phone, you are suspended. The private high school my DD is attending next year has a similar airtight policy. What I don’t understand is why are some public school parents opposed to this? Do you really want your kids staring at their cell phones all day? Do you really want your kid’s ability to socialize limited because kids are too busy watching and sharing stupid reels? You really have to put your foot down at some point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As to delaying start times, how do you intend to compensate for the hardship this creates for families depending on older siblings to look after younger siblings after school or for kids who have to work to contribute to the family’s income? I don’t think it will help a student’s well-being and performance if their younger siblings are removed from the home by CPS and their parents are being charged for leaving young children unattended, or if the family faces food and/or housing insecurity from loss of income of the high schoolers after-school jobs.

As for cellphones, I’m confused by what, specifically, you’re objecting to. If you’re objecting to phone usage in class, I think everyone agrees that would be problematic and is already against policy, although perhaps the policy needs to be enforced more vigorously. If you’re objecting to a student’s use of a cellphone at home, I think you’re being shortsighted, sanctimonious, and presumptuous. Indubitably, there is some content students access on cellphones that can be extremely damaging. There is also content that can be educational and provide other positive benefits. Basically it’s a tool that allows access to electronic media, that like any media should be judged on the content rather than the format. I think most problematic content is not uniquely dependent on cellphones, but could be accessed through most electronic devices (laptops, desktops, tablets, etc.). Are you suggesting that high school students should regress to the ‘80s and rely on print versions of encyclopedias for research and typewriters to prepare their essays?

If you’re concerned about how the student’s home life is affecting their physical, mental, and emotional well-being, have you considered the effects of having marijuana smokers in their home? Even if the student doesn’t smoke themselves, we learned from tobacco that exposure to secondhand smoke is also serious. According to the CDC, not only can can secondhand exposure make someone high (which would seem to impair a student’s attempt to do homework and study), it can also have longterm impacts on a developing brain including causing problems with attention, motivation, and memory. If you want to try and regulate a student’s home life, this would seem to be more urgent than whether they have access to a cellphone.

Hey Sarah Huckabee, we are not accommodating the child labor needs of corporations and families should not be dependent on their child's labor to survive in any way

Then MCPS/you/the county needs to provide free child care in every school and offer more day care vouchers with day cares that accept it if you don't want siblings to care for each other. Check your privilege.

It's always FREE with you people.

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at a private MS but going to public for HS. Cell phone use is strictly prohibited during the school day right now.
Her friends in mcps have their phone with them all day long. There are videos being taken and shared in hallways and classroom. At lunch they’re staring at their phones. So even though I can Police my own kid, her experience at school will still be surrounded by cell phone useage.
It needs to be banned completely. They stay in backpacks. If you’re caught with it out it’s confiscated and taken to office where parent has to pick it up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As to delaying start times, how do you intend to compensate for the hardship this creates for families depending on older siblings to look after younger siblings after school or for kids who have to work to contribute to the family’s income? I don’t think it will help a student’s well-being and performance if their younger siblings are removed from the home by CPS and their parents are being charged for leaving young children unattended, or if the family faces food and/or housing insecurity from loss of income of the high schoolers after-school jobs.

As for cellphones, I’m confused by what, specifically, you’re objecting to. If you’re objecting to phone usage in class, I think everyone agrees that would be problematic and is already against policy, although perhaps the policy needs to be enforced more vigorously. If you’re objecting to a student’s use of a cellphone at home, I think you’re being shortsighted, sanctimonious, and presumptuous. Indubitably, there is some content students access on cellphones that can be extremely damaging. There is also content that can be educational and provide other positive benefits. Basically it’s a tool that allows access to electronic media, that like any media should be judged on the content rather than the format. I think most problematic content is not uniquely dependent on cellphones, but could be accessed through most electronic devices (laptops, desktops, tablets, etc.). Are you suggesting that high school students should regress to the ‘80s and rely on print versions of encyclopedias for research and typewriters to prepare their essays?

If you’re concerned about how the student’s home life is affecting their physical, mental, and emotional well-being, have you considered the effects of having marijuana smokers in their home? Even if the student doesn’t smoke themselves, we learned from tobacco that exposure to secondhand smoke is also serious. According to the CDC, not only can can secondhand exposure make someone high (which would seem to impair a student’s attempt to do homework and study), it can also have longterm impacts on a developing brain including causing problems with attention, motivation, and memory. If you want to try and regulate a student’s home life, this would seem to be more urgent than whether they have access to a cellphone.

Hey Sarah Huckabee, we are not accommodating the child labor needs of corporations and families should not be dependent on their child's labor to survive in any way

Then MCPS/you/the county needs to provide free child care in every school and offer more day care vouchers with day cares that accept it if you don't want siblings to care for each other. Check your privilege.

That's going to happen. It's called Blueprint for Maryland's Future.

No, its not, MCPS is screaming poverty and making cuts. How are they going to provide child care?

PP is right. The Blueprint calls for middle class and up to pay for all sorts of services for poor people: food clothing, before school care, after school care, summer care, medicine, tutoring, etc. And they'll pay for it just like they pay for everything...raising taxes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:notes to our principal

Start School Later: Consider delaying the start of the school day to after 8:30 AM. Research shows that later start times can significantly benefit students who are currently showing signs of exhaustion. This change is not only age-appropriate but has also been linked to improved student performance and well-being.

Cell Phone Use and Mental Health: There is a growing concern about cell phone addiction and its detrimental effects on students in the classroom. With mental health issues at unprecedented levels among youth, it is crucial to address and manage cell phone usage to foster a healthier learning environment and care for our kids addictions.

Later start times - I wish but this is not practical. This was already settled.

Cell Phone Use - not necessary. Parents can install parental controls if they are concerned. It's not the county's job to parent. They should focus on education and let families set their own priorities.

No it's not settled. There are board members who are in favor of later start times because the science is clear on the benefits. Keep going on this parents.

It's settled.

No, sorry, but it isn't.

You can keep making these false statements or just accept that this is SETTLED!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:notes to our principal

Start School Later: Consider delaying the start of the school day to after 8:30 AM. Research shows that later start times can significantly benefit students who are currently showing signs of exhaustion. This change is not only age-appropriate but has also been linked to improved student performance and well-being.

Cell Phone Use and Mental Health: There is a growing concern about cell phone addiction and its detrimental effects on students in the classroom. With mental health issues at unprecedented levels among youth, it is crucial to address and manage cell phone usage to foster a healthier learning environment and care for our kids addictions.

Later start times - I wish but this is not practical. This was already settled.

Cell Phone Use - not necessary. Parents can install parental controls if they are concerned. It's not the county's job to parent. They should focus on education and let families set their own priorities.

No it's not settled. There are board members who are in favor of later start times because the science is clear on the benefits. Keep going on this parents.

It's settled.

No, sorry, but it isn't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As to delaying start times, how do you intend to compensate for the hardship this creates for families depending on older siblings to look after younger siblings after school or for kids who have to work to contribute to the family’s income? I don’t think it will help a student’s well-being and performance if their younger siblings are removed from the home by CPS and their parents are being charged for leaving young children unattended, or if the family faces food and/or housing insecurity from loss of income of the high schoolers after-school jobs.

As for cellphones, I’m confused by what, specifically, you’re objecting to. If you’re objecting to phone usage in class, I think everyone agrees that would be problematic and is already against policy, although perhaps the policy needs to be enforced more vigorously. If you’re objecting to a student’s use of a cellphone at home, I think you’re being shortsighted, sanctimonious, and presumptuous. Indubitably, there is some content students access on cellphones that can be extremely damaging. There is also content that can be educational and provide other positive benefits. Basically it’s a tool that allows access to electronic media, that like any media should be judged on the content rather than the format. I think most problematic content is not uniquely dependent on cellphones, but could be accessed through most electronic devices (laptops, desktops, tablets, etc.). Are you suggesting that high school students should regress to the ‘80s and rely on print versions of encyclopedias for research and typewriters to prepare their essays?

If you’re concerned about how the student’s home life is affecting their physical, mental, and emotional well-being, have you considered the effects of having marijuana smokers in their home? Even if the student doesn’t smoke themselves, we learned from tobacco that exposure to secondhand smoke is also serious. According to the CDC, not only can can secondhand exposure make someone high (which would seem to impair a student’s attempt to do homework and study), it can also have longterm impacts on a developing brain including causing problems with attention, motivation, and memory. If you want to try and regulate a student’s home life, this would seem to be more urgent than whether they have access to a cellphone.

Hey Sarah Huckabee, we are not accommodating the child labor needs of corporations and families should not be dependent on their child's labor to survive in any way

Then MCPS/you/the county needs to provide free child care in every school and offer more day care vouchers with day cares that accept it if you don't want siblings to care for each other. Check your privilege.

That's going to happen. It's called Blueprint for Maryland's Future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As to delaying start times, how do you intend to compensate for the hardship this creates for families depending on older siblings to look after younger siblings after school or for kids who have to work to contribute to the family’s income? I don’t think it will help a student’s well-being and performance if their younger siblings are removed from the home by CPS and their parents are being charged for leaving young children unattended, or if the family faces food and/or housing insecurity from loss of income of the high schoolers after-school jobs.

As for cellphones, I’m confused by what, specifically, you’re objecting to. If you’re objecting to phone usage in class, I think everyone agrees that would be problematic and is already against policy, although perhaps the policy needs to be enforced more vigorously. If you’re objecting to a student’s use of a cellphone at home, I think you’re being shortsighted, sanctimonious, and presumptuous. Indubitably, there is some content students access on cellphones that can be extremely damaging. There is also content that can be educational and provide other positive benefits. Basically it’s a tool that allows access to electronic media, that like any media should be judged on the content rather than the format. I think most problematic content is not uniquely dependent on cellphones, but could be accessed through most electronic devices (laptops, desktops, tablets, etc.). Are you suggesting that high school students should regress to the ‘80s and rely on print versions of encyclopedias for research and typewriters to prepare their essays?

If you’re concerned about how the student’s home life is affecting their physical, mental, and emotional well-being, have you considered the effects of having marijuana smokers in their home? Even if the student doesn’t smoke themselves, we learned from tobacco that exposure to secondhand smoke is also serious. According to the CDC, not only can can secondhand exposure make someone high (which would seem to impair a student’s attempt to do homework and study), it can also have longterm impacts on a developing brain including causing problems with attention, motivation, and memory. If you want to try and regulate a student’s home life, this would seem to be more urgent than whether they have access to a cellphone.

Hey Sarah Huckabee, we are not accommodating the child labor needs of corporations and families should not be dependent on their child's labor to survive in any way

Then MCPS/you/the county needs to provide free child care in every school and offer more day care vouchers with day cares that accept it if you don't want siblings to care for each other. Check your privilege.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:notes to our principal

Start School Later: Consider delaying the start of the school day to after 8:30 AM. Research shows that later start times can significantly benefit students who are currently showing signs of exhaustion. This change is not only age-appropriate but has also been linked to improved student performance and well-being.

Cell Phone Use and Mental Health: There is a growing concern about cell phone addiction and its detrimental effects on students in the classroom. With mental health issues at unprecedented levels among youth, it is crucial to address and manage cell phone usage to foster a healthier learning environment and care for our kids addictions.

Later start times - I wish but this is not practical. This was already settled.

Cell Phone Use - not necessary. Parents can install parental controls if they are concerned. It's not the county's job to parent. They should focus on education and let families set their own priorities.

No it's not settled. There are board members who are in favor of later start times because the science is clear on the benefits. Keep going on this parents.

It's settled.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As to delaying start times, how do you intend to compensate for the hardship this creates for families depending on older siblings to look after younger siblings after school or for kids who have to work to contribute to the family’s income? I don’t think it will help a student’s well-being and performance if their younger siblings are removed from the home by CPS and their parents are being charged for leaving young children unattended, or if the family faces food and/or housing insecurity from loss of income of the high schoolers after-school jobs.

As for cellphones, I’m confused by what, specifically, you’re objecting to. If you’re objecting to phone usage in class, I think everyone agrees that would be problematic and is already against policy, although perhaps the policy needs to be enforced more vigorously. If you’re objecting to a student’s use of a cellphone at home, I think you’re being shortsighted, sanctimonious, and presumptuous. Indubitably, there is some content students access on cellphones that can be extremely damaging. There is also content that can be educational and provide other positive benefits. Basically it’s a tool that allows access to electronic media, that like any media should be judged on the content rather than the format. I think most problematic content is not uniquely dependent on cellphones, but could be accessed through most electronic devices (laptops, desktops, tablets, etc.). Are you suggesting that high school students should regress to the ‘80s and rely on print versions of encyclopedias for research and typewriters to prepare their essays?

If you’re concerned about how the student’s home life is affecting their physical, mental, and emotional well-being, have you considered the effects of having marijuana smokers in their home? Even if the student doesn’t smoke themselves, we learned from tobacco that exposure to secondhand smoke is also serious. According to the CDC, not only can can secondhand exposure make someone high (which would seem to impair a student’s attempt to do homework and study), it can also have longterm impacts on a developing brain including causing problems with attention, motivation, and memory. If you want to try and regulate a student’s home life, this would seem to be more urgent than whether they have access to a cellphone.

Hey Sarah Huckabee, we are not accommodating the child labor needs of corporations and families should not be dependent on their child's labor to survive in any way